• Pragerisms

    For a more comprehensive list of Pragerisms visit
    Dennis Prager Wisdom.

    • "The left is far more interested in gaining power than in creating wealth."
    • "Without wisdom, goodness is worthless."
    • "I prefer clarity to agreement."
    • "First tell the truth, then state your opinion."
    • "Being on the Left means never having to say you're sorry."
    • "If you don't fight evil, you fight gobal warming."
    • "There are things that are so dumb, you have to learn them."
  • Liberalism’s Seven Deadly Sins

    • Sexism
    • Intolerance
    • Xenophobia
    • Racism
    • Islamophobia
    • Bigotry
    • Homophobia

    A liberal need only accuse you of one of the above in order to end all discussion and excuse himself from further elucidation of his position.

  • Glenn’s Reading List for Die-Hard Pragerites

    • Bolton, John - Surrender is not an Option
    • Bruce, Tammy - The Thought Police; The New American Revolution; The Death of Right and Wrong
    • Charen, Mona - DoGooders:How Liberals Hurt Those They Claim to Help
    • Coulter, Ann - If Democrats Had Any Brains, They'd Be Republicans; Slander
    • Dalrymple, Theodore - In Praise of Prejudice; Our Culture, What's Left of It
    • Doyle, William - Inside the Oval Office
    • Elder, Larry - Stupid Black Men: How to Play the Race Card--and Lose
    • Frankl, Victor - Man's Search for Meaning
    • Flynn, Daniel - Intellectual Morons
    • Fund, John - Stealing Elections
    • Friedman, George - America's Secret War
    • Goldberg, Bernard - Bias; Arrogance
    • Goldberg, Jonah - Liberal Fascism
    • Herson, James - Tales from the Left Coast
    • Horowitz, David - Left Illusions; The Professors
    • Klein, Edward - The Truth about Hillary
    • Mnookin, Seth - Hard News: Twenty-one Brutal Months at The New York Times and How They Changed the American Media
    • Morris, Dick - Because He Could; Rewriting History
    • O'Beirne, Kate - Women Who Make the World Worse
    • Olson, Barbara - The Final Days: The Last, Desperate Abuses of Power by the Clinton White House
    • O'Neill, John - Unfit For Command
    • Piereson, James - Camelot and the Cultural Revolution: How the Assassination of John F. Kennedy Shattered American Liberalism
    • Prager, Dennis - Think A Second Time
    • Sharansky, Natan - The Case for Democracy
    • Stein, Ben - Can America Survive? The Rage of the Left, the Truth, and What to Do About It
    • Steyn, Mark - America Alone
    • Stephanopolous, George - All Too Human
    • Thomas, Clarence - My Grandfather's Son
    • Timmerman, Kenneth - Shadow Warriors
    • Williams, Juan - Enough: The Phony Leaders, Dead-End Movements, and Culture of Failure That Are Undermining Black America--and What We Can Do About It
    • Wright, Lawrence - The Looming Tower

Courageous Fan Waves Her Trump 2020 Flag!

The Frightened Old Woman with Her Trump 2020 Flag

By Lloyd Marcus at American Thinker:

.

Scouting a location to shoot a promotional video for my Trump Train 2020 song, my wife Mary and I spotted a lovely home with a huge Trump 2020 flag waving in the breeze on a flagpole. After knocking on the front door and introducing myself, I assured the elderly white homeowner that we would not show her address in our video.

Still, she declined our request to allow Mary to shoot video of me with her Trump 2020 flag in the background. She was terrified of being persecuted by Trump haters. It is outrageous that citizens are afraid to publicly express support for the president of the United States. The atrocious reality is Democrats and fake news media continue to instigate hate and violence against Trump voters.

Folks, we are in the process of losing our country right now, not somewhere down the road. Democrats are aggressively repealing your constitutional right to free speech. New York City will fine you $250,000 for saying “illegal alien.”

The only thing standing between Democrats and fake news media implementing their insane job-killing, anti-American, socialistic, and anti-Christian agenda nationwide is Donald J. Trump in the White House.

Fake News Media and Democrats’ hate-driven obsession with removing Trump from office is so over-the-top that it has literally become an episode of the “Twilight Zone.” Irrefutable proof that Trump did not pressure the Ukraine president to interfere in our election is being ignored. Democrats are moving forward with impeaching Trump based solely on Adam Schiff’s easily proven lies about what Trump said to the president of Ukraine.

Democrats have put all their eggs to win the presidency in 2020 into their Impeach-Trump basket. Their game plan is to sell voters their absurd lie that Trump is so corrupt that they had to impeach him.

The truth is that Trump has done nothing wrong. As a matter of fact, Trump is determined to restore power, as written in the Constitution, to We the People. He has built an unprecedented long list of remarkable achievements for America.  If Trump is not reelected, Democrats will begin reversing his achievements, repealing your individual liberties, and abandoning Trump’s America first agenda.

This is why my Trump Train 2020 song is so important. It is not just an ordinary nice song. I sincerely believe it was divinely inspired for such a crucial time as this. My Trump Train 2020 song will inspire, encourage, and embolden you. The song lets people know the great things Trump has done and is doing to save and restore our beloved country. Keeping his promises, Trump truly is making America great again.

Here is a bit of insider info about the recording session of the Trump Train 2020 song. My music producer and I had trouble finding Maryland singers and a recording studio willing to record a song supportive of Trump. We eventually found a recording studio. Singers from various states responded to my clarion call. We had singers black and white, old and young. Fourteen-year-old Justice, whose mom brought her all the way to Maryland from Florida, did a great job belting out her solo line, “Can you hear the whistle sound!” I love this kid.

After our awesome recording session which felt like a family reunion, the owner of the recording studio emailed me. He raved about how much fun he had and how it was a pleasure working with such a great group of nice people. Clearly, we Trump supporters were not the deplorable racist haters characterized by fake news media and Democrats.

Patriots, I cannot express upon you how important it is that we counter fake news media and Democrats’ relentless 24/7 flooding the airwaves with lies designed to deceive, intimidate, and dispirit Trump and his supporters. To win in 2020, Democrats and fake news media hope to destroy Trump’s character in the minds of a majority of voters.

It is infuriating that Democrats’ resistance to Trump has become so deranged that the elderly white woman with the Trump 2020 flag was afraid to risk her home being seen in my video.

I shot my one-minute promotional video for the Trump Train 2020 song at the beautiful Potomac river in West Virginia.

To be reelected, president Trump desperately needs and truly appreciates the support of everyone who loves America.

Lloyd Marcus, The Unhyphenated American

https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2019/10/the_frightened_old_woman_with_her_trump_2020_flag.html

Fascism Reeks at the New York Times! Truth Has No Meaning!!

COULTER: Here’s Why The New York Times Must Die

by  Ann Coulter, Political Commentator at Daily Caller:

Even before The New York Times launched its “All Slavery, All the Time” project, no one could accuse that paper of skimping on its race coverage, particularly stories about black males killed by white(ish) police officers.

Here’s one you haven’t heard about. I happened upon it by sheer accident.

Antwon Rose II was a 17-year-old boy shot by an East Pittsburgh police officer in June 2018 after he bolted from a jitney car that had been stopped by the officer. The Times published about a half-dozen stories on Antwon Rose — or as the Times calls him, “Antwon, who was unarmed.”

After the officer was acquitted on all charges in March of this year, the Times ran an article by Adeel Hassan on the verdict.

(RELATED: Court Tells Washington Post: Don’t Try Too Hard To Get It Right!)

Here’s what you would learn from the Times:

— Antwon was unarmed.

17-Year-Old Sentenced To Life In Prison ForRunning Over Baltimore Police Officer

Antwon “was in his high school’s honors program.”

Antwon “played basketball and the saxophone.”

Antwon “volunteered for a local charity.”

— In 2016, Antwon wrote a poem titled, “I Am Not What You Think!” which included these lines:

I see mothers bury their sons
I want my Mom to never feel that pain.

— A policeman stopped the gold Chevy Cruze Antwon “was riding in” because it “matched the description” of a car “involved” in a drive-by shooting minutes earlier.

— The jury consisted of nine whites and three African Americans.

If you read the Times piece, all you would know is that an honor student who loved his mom … was KILLED for the crime of riding in a car similar to one that had just been used in a crime.

Wow. Just wow.

Here are some of the facts the Times left out:

— The gold Chevy Cruze Antwon fled did not merely “match the description of” a car used in a drive-by shooting: It was the car used in the drive-by shooting, as proved by surveillance video posted online days after the shooting and shown to the jury.

— The video shows 13 shots being fired from the back seat of that exact car, with — according to the prosecutor — Antwon riding in the front seat.

— The backseat passenger, Zaijuan Hester, later pleaded guilty to the drive-by shooting.

— One of the victims of the drive-by shooting told police it was Antwon who shot him. “The beef was between me and him,” William Ross told a Pennsylvania State Police officer. “That car came by, he shot me, I ran to the store.”

— The jitney driver told police that, right before the shooting started, he heard the backseat passenger ask, “Is that him?”

— The gun used in the drive-by was recovered in the back seat of the car.

— A stolen gun was found under Antwon’s seat, an empty magazine in Antwon’s pants pocket, and there was gunpowder residue on Antwon’s hands.

— The car stopped by the officer was riddled with bullet holes.

— The jury that unanimously acquitted the officer was led by an African American foreman, who stoutly defended the verdict.

None of that made it into the Times story on the trial’s conclusion.

I’m glad that Antwon did charity work, but isn’t it rather more important that he had participated in a drive-by shooting of two other black guys 13 minutes before being stopped by a police officer?

That’s not conjecture or speculation. Hassan wasn’t writing about the case the day after the shooting. These are facts that were presented in court and copiously reported by the local media — even in the British press.

Normal Person to The New York Times: Why did you say the car “matched the description” of the car used in a drive-by shooting — but not say that it WAS the car used in the drive-by shooting?

NYT: I’m sorry, who are you and do you have a press pass?

Normal Person: You didn’t mention that a stolen gun was found under Antwon’s seat and a matching cartridge in Antwon’s pocket???

NYT: We only have so much space and I needed room for Antwon’s poem.

Normal Person: You didn’t have space to say that gun residue was found on Antwon’s hands?

NYT: I could have run more of the poem. It was a good poem.

Normal Person: Or that one of the victims of the drive-by said Antwon was the one who shot him?

NYT: The officer didn’t know that.

Normal Person: Did the officer know about Antwon’s A.P. classes? It goes to the likelihood of his behavior being perceived as threatening. The officer could certainly see that the car’s back window had been shot out.

NYT: You’re a white supremacist and white nationalist and, yes, I know they’re different, but you’re both.

There’s no reason to think this isn’t standard operating procedure at the Times. The editors can’t say, OK, OK, that one got past us!

The Times has told wild lies about the racist shooting of Michael Brown in Ferguson, Missouri (false), the racist arrest of Freddie Grey in Baltimore (false), the racist shooting of Trayvon Martin in Florida (false), the racist gang-rape of a black stripper by a Duke lacrosse team (false) and so on.

Antwon Rose’s shooting wasn’t even a flood-the-zone, hair-on-fire story. But the Times lied about it, too.

This is a newspaper that cannot be trusted on anything touching on race. They’re liars and ideologues, not reporters and editors.

Ann Coulter is a syndicated columnist and lawyer.

https://dailycaller.com/2019/08/21/coulter-new-york-times/

Getting to Know “Minnesota” Omar Better

DAVID STEINBERG: TYING UP LOOSE THREADS IN THE CURIOUS CASE

by Scott Johnson  at PowerLine:

In four intensely reported investigative columns — here (August 13, 2018), here (October 23, 2018), here (October 30, 2018), and here (November 5, 2018), — David Steinberg has explored the evidence suggesting that Ilhan Omar entered into a sham marriage with her brother in 2009. This is his fifth. He titles it “Meet Leila Elmi: The Missing Link Showing Ilhan Omar Married Her Brother.” Drawing on his research, interviews, and social media evidence he makes the case that Omar has engaged in a variety of fraudulent activities and willful misrepresentations related to her marital arrangements. He writes:

On October 22, 2008, the U.S. State Department stopped accepting applications for the Priority 3/Refugee Family Reunification program — the process by which refugees can apply for asylum if one family member is already a legal U.S. resident. State halted the program because DNA testing — primarily of Somalis — had concluded that perhaps 87 percent of applicants were fraudulently claiming family relationships.

Despite continuing war, Somalia of 2008 was not comparable to the open hell of the early 1990s, when an eight-year-old Ilhan and her family fled to Kenya’s Dadaab refugee camps. She lived there from 1991 until 1995, aged eight to 12. Lutheran Immigration and Refugee Services then helped Ilhan, her sister Sahra, and their father Nur Said receive asylum in the United States along with thousands of other Somalis.

The complicated moral question of fraud, let alone fault, among this 1990s wave of refugees escaping civil war will never be answered with accurate statistics. We will have to settle for adjectives like “widespread” and “rampant.” Yet the negative outcomes cannot be ignored. Even refugees with strong desire to assimilate with Western civic order are hampered by the possible discovery of conflicting documents. And compromising information becomes leverage in a community already difficult to police.

Twelve-year-old Ilhan had no say on the manner in which she arrived in the United States.

However, U.S. Congresswoman Ilhan Abdullahi Omar (D-MN) is now under scrutiny for acts she took beginning in 2009 — not 1995. In 2009, Omar was a 26-year-old U.S. citizen. She had been a U.S. citizen for nearly nine years.

Additionally, the foreign national Omar apparently helped commit fraud was not fleeing hell in 2009, either. Ahmed Nur Said Elmi was a long-time citizen of the United Kingdom. He even possessed a high school diploma from the United States: Elmi attended a St. Paul, Minnesota high school for his senior year of 2002-2003, and graduated before returning to London.

We look to 1995 not to incriminate a kid, but to answer questions about what Omar did 14 years later as an adult U.S. citizen.

Please read the verified evidence below — and read it alongside the three years of verified evidence published by Scott Johnson, Preya Samsundar, and myself (our work is linked here). The answers to those questions about 2009 appear to give probable cause to investigate Omar for eight instances of perjury, immigration fraud, marriage fraud, up to eight years of state and federal tax fraud, two years of federal student loan fraud, and even bigamy.

To be clear: The facts describe perhaps the most extensive spree of illegal misconduct committed by a House member in American history.

———————-

The preceding information was given to me by multiple sources within the Minneapolis Somali community. The verifiable evidence corroborating their information follows below:

In 1995, Ilhan entered the United States as a fraudulent member of the “Omar” family.

That is not her family. The Omar family is a second, unrelated family which was being granted asylum by the United States. The Omars allowed Ilhan, her genetic sister Sahra, and her genetic father Nur Said to use false names to apply for asylum as members of the Omar family.

Ilhan’s genetic family split up at this time. The above three received asylum in the United States, while Ilhan’s three other siblings — using their real names — managed to get asylum in the United Kingdom.

Ilhan Abdullahi Omar’s name, before applying for asylum, was Ilhan Nur Said Elmi.

Her father’s name before applying for asylum was Nur Said Elmi Mohamed. Her sister Sahra Noor’s name before applying for asylum was Sahra Nur Said Elmi. Her three siblings who were granted asylum by the United Kingdom are Leila Nur Said Elmi, Mohamed Nur Said Elmi, and Ahmed Nur Said Elmi.

Ilhan and Ahmed married in 2009, presumably to benefit in some way from a fraudulent marriage. They did not divorce until 2017.

Above: This chart summarizes how multiple sources in the Minneapolis Somali community describe key events in the life of MN Representative Ilhan Abdullahi Omar — whom these sources state was born as “Ilhan Nur Said Elmi.”

———————-

Confirming some of the above information, as it might appear on their 1995 U.S. immigration papers, is not difficult. A basic background search shows that “Nur Omar Mohamed,” “Ilhan Abdullahi Omar,” and “Sahra Noor” all received SSNs in 1995 or 1996 in Virginia. Verified address records show adult members of the Omars living at three addresses in Arlington, Virginia at that time: 1223 South Thomas Street, 1226 South Thomas Street, and 1107 South Thomas Street.

The United Kingdom records of the relevant individuals are similarly easy to find. Try with a simple Ancestry.com account and similar online tools: There appears to be only one “Leila Nur Said Elmi,” only one “Mohamed Nur Said Elmi,” and only one “Ahmed Nur Said Elmi” in the UK.

The remaining evidence below verifies a sibling relationship between Ilhan and Ahmed.

————————

Sahra Noor is the only person Ilhan Omar has ever publicly identified as her sister. Ilhan and Sahra have also, publicly and often, referred to the same man as their father. And, per Preya Samsundar’s 2016 investigation, they both identified this man as “Nur Said”:

The above image, a screenshot of Sahra Noor’s confirmed Facebook account, was first published by Preya Samsundar in 2016.

He also identifies himself as “Nur Said”.

See below — this is a screenshot of his current Facebook account. As of this article’s publication, it is active and searchable by anyone online. (I have archived his page with archive.is):

Note this thumbnail of “Leyla Cilmi,” listed as a friend of Nur Said.

In 2018, as I published a series of articles investigating Ilhan’s past, this account name changed from “Leila Elmi” to “Leyla Cilmi.”

However, the URL did not change. It still refers to “leila.elmi”:

Below, see the 1997 marriage certificate for the only Leila Nur Said Elmi listed in the United Kingdom.

I retrieved this certified copy from a government records center in London in February of this year; note the date in the document’s lower right corner. This is a public record. Anyone can retrieve this document to verify its authenticity.

See that Leila attests to her father’s name being “Nur Said Elmi”:

So far, we have verifiable evidence that Ilhan Abdullahi Omar, Sahra Noor, and Leila Nur Said Elmi referring to their respective fathers as “Nur Said” or “Nur Said Elmi.”

Next, we have verifiable evidence showing the three are sisters, and are all referring to the same man.
——————–

See below: These two posts appeared on Ilhan Omar’s confirmed Instagram account in 2013 and 2015, respectively. (Instagram user “hameey” became the blue-checked “IlhanMN” account at some point in 2016. A cursory search through older posts on the “IlhanMN” account still reveals many instances of commenters addressing “IlhanMN” as “hameey.”)

In August 2016 — after Scott Johnson and Preya Samsundar originally broke the story about Ilhan’s curious marriage — the below post disappeared from Ilhan Omar’s Instagram account.

However, a source within the Minneapolis Somali community had downloaded much of Omar’s Instagram account before posts were deleted.

The source recently reviewed these two deleted posts, recognized their significance, and sent them to me via email. I made these emails available to Power Line to confirm how I received these posts, and to confirm that this particular source had provided several other pieces of information that had proven authentic and verifiable:

You are looking at what appears to be Leila Elmi, Nur Said, and Ilhan Omar — together. According to Ilhan, they are pictured on an August 2011 trip to East Africa.

Now, see below: You are looking at what appears to be Leila Elmi in white, Ilhan in black, and Ilhan’s amazing caption in red:

Further, the above post, with the #londontrip hashtag, depicts Ilhan Omar’s infamous 2015 trip to the UK. This is the same trip on which Ilhan was photographed with Ahmed Nur Said Elmi himself:

Below, see one more piece of evidence establishing Leila Elmi as Ilhan’s sister. This post is currently live, and I have archived it.

In December 2016, Ilhan reported that she was harassed by a cab driver while in Washington, D.C. attending meetings. She claimed that the cab driver called her “ISIS” and threatened to remove her hijab. A few days later, Ilhan filed a report with the D.C. Department of For-Hire Vehicles and the D.C. Office of Human Rights.

Ilhan initially stated that she was accompanied in the cab by her “sister.” A Star Tribune reporter in 2016 claimed to have a copy of her complaint, and that it stated she had been in the cab with her sister.

I few months ago, I received a copy of Ilhan’s report via FOIA request. The description of the person Ilhan had been in the cab with was redacted.

Suleiman Axoow, per his profile, is a frequent host of social events for the Washington, D.C. Somali-American community. On December 9, 2016, Suleiman Axoow stated that he was with Ilhan soon after the cab incident:

On Wednesday night I had an opportunity to have dinner with State Representative-Elect Ilhan Omar & her lovely sis Leila Elmi …

Check the “Edit History” on Suleiman’s Axoow’s post. He even initially included a link to the Leila Elmi/Leyla Cilmi account:

It is not plausible to believe that Axoow simply made a mistake.

One would have to believe that Axoow:

  1. Had dinner with Ilhan and a second woman;
  2. that the woman was introduced to him as any other person alive;
  3. and that a couple days later he made the 1-in-7-billion mistake of misremembering this woman as Ilhan Omar’s “lovely sis Leila Elmi.” A random name of a woman from England he has no clear reason to know.

Ilhan has steadfastly refused to give media the names of any of her siblings besides Sahra Noor. The only rational explanation: Leila Elmi was in the United States to visit Ilhan Omar, attended this dinner with her, and Ilhan (carelessly?) introduced her as Axoow describes.

We now have verifiable evidence that Ilhan Omar, Sahra Noor, and Leila Elmi are siblings with a father named Nur Said Elmi.

All that remains is to verify our sources’ claims that Ahmed Nur Said Elmi is indeed Leila Nur Said Elmi’s brother.

————————-

We have a great, easy start: Leila and Ahmed already appear to be two of the only three “Nur Said Elmis” in the United Kingdom.

Next, view the marriage certificate again: It attests that Leila Nur Said Elmi lived in Camden, a borough of London, in 1997, and that she was 24 years old at the time.

Ahmed Nur Said Elmi was 12 in 1997. Per his own admission, he attended a school in Camden for students aged 11 to 18: Haverstock School. (See its address here; “Camden” is in the school’s URL: https://www.haverstock.camden.sch.uk/.)

This link on Ahmed’s confirmed Facebook account is currently live, and I have archived the page:

(Note that he lists his current location as “Nairobi, Kenya.” See here for definitive evidencethat Ahmed has recently been working in Nairobi with — of all people — Sahra Noor.)

Back in August 2016, Preya Samsundar posted two finds now worth revisiting:

  1. Ahmed Nur Said Elmi’s Instagram post calling two young twin girls with a backpack from a primary school in Camden his “nieces.” Ilhan’s Instagram account “loved” the post.
  2. Ilhan’s Instagram post picturing herself with the same twin girls. Ilhan marked her location as “Camden Lock Village.” Ilhan also calls the girls “her nieces.” The post is yet another that is tagged #londontrip from 2015.

The twin girls are, indeed, the daughters of Leila Nur Said Elmi. This can be confirmed by anyone through posts that are currently active on Mohamed Nur Said Elmi’s Facebook account.

We now have verifiable evidence that:

  1. Sahra Noor, Ilhan Omar, and Leila Elmi are siblings with a father named Nur Said Elmi.
  2. Leila Elmi and Ahmed Nur Said Elmi both lived in the same neighborhood of London, and know each other.
  3. Both Ilhan Omar and Ahmed Nur Said Elmi call Leila Elmi’s children “nieces.”

——————–

Earlier this year, a source gave me one more piece of information that would inform UK law enforcement — if granted a warrant — where to locate conclusive proof that Ahmed Nur Said Elmi married his sister Ilhan Omar.

Ahmed Nur Said Elmi apparently arrived in the United Kingdom in 1995 or 1996, only 10 or 11 years old, without a parent. Who looked after him until he arrived in the United States in 2002?

According to my sources, it was Leila.

There is no adoption record (which can be public in the UK); it would have been a “Kinship Care” or “Family and Friends Carer” arrangement. I am advised that Haverstock School would have records of student Ahmed Nur Said Elmi living at the same address as Leila Elmi with her listed as his guardian.

However, these two very recent posts — currently active on Instagram and archived — already put a nice bow on everything. Here are Leila and Ahmed calling each other “mum” and “son”:

—————-

On August 10, 2017, Ilhan swore under penalty of perjury — literally, she signed a half-inch or so under “penalty of perjury” — that she’d had zero contact with Ahmed Nur Said Elmi after June 2011.

Further, Ilhan swore that she did not know where to find him, and that she did not know a single person who was likely to know his whereabouts. She did this to apply for a default divorce from Ahmed — a divorce where one spouse cannot be located and served.

Now, a tremendous amount of evidence — from this article and our prior articles — shows that Ilhan perhaps perjured herself eight times with her nine answers. Minnesota’s perjury statute allows for a sentence of up to five years — for each instance:

Yet this may be the least worrisome of her current legal exposures.

Consider the disturbingly inadequate evidence used to obtain FISA warrants on members of Donald Trump’s 2016 presidential campaign. Consider that Democratic representatives have demanded that Attorney General William Barr release grand jury testimony — itself an illegal act.

Yet here we have:

  • Verifiable UK and U.S. marriage records
  • Verifiable address records
  • Time-stamped, traceable, archived online communications (Convictions and settlements based upon social media evidence are commonplace, Anthony Weiner being a notable example)
  • Background check confirmations of SSNs and birthdates
  • Archived court documents signed under penalty of perjury
  • Photos which can be examined to rule out digital manipulation
  • The 2019 Minnesota Campaign Finance and Public Disclosure Board investigation, which found Omar filed illegal joint tax returns with a man who was not her husband in at least 2014 and 2015
  • Three years’ of evidence published across many articles — none of which has been shown to be incorrect, or have even been challenged with contradictory evidence from Rep. Omar or any other source
  • Perjury evidence that stands on its own — regardless of whom she married:
    • Long after June 2011, she was clearly in contact with the only man in either the U.S. or the UK with the same name and birthdate as the man she married. She was clearly in contact with several people who were in contact with him.
    • Further, Preya Samsundar did contact him, published how she managed to contact him, and published his email admitting to being photographed with Omar in London in 2015. To be clear: Omar was legally married to an “Ahmed Nur Said Elmi” at the time she was photographed next to a man who admits his name is Ahmed Nur Said Elmi, and that he is in the photo.
    • Samsundar published all of this information on how to contact Ahmed Nur Said Elmi a few months before Omar swore to that nine-question court document.
  • Rep. Omar has refused all inquiries from her constituents, elected officials, and media outlets to provide any specific evidence contradicting even a single allegation suggested by three years of now-public information.
  • In fact, Omar has responded by making information less available:
    • In August 2016, after Scott Johnson and Preya Samsundar posted the allegations, Omar’s verified social media accounts were taken offline.
    • Ahmed Nur Said Elmi’s social media accounts were also taken offline.
    • When the accounts returned, a large amount of potentially incriminating evidence had verifiably been deleted.
    • I found and published at least ten additional “before and after” instances of evidence still being deleted in 2018.
  • Omar has released carefully worded, Clintonian statements that denigrate those seeking answers from her as racists. Yet she has repeatedly refused to answer questions or issue anything other than public relations statements.
  • I have a large amount of information that we have not published for reasons including the protection of sources.

I believe Scott Johnson, Preya Samsundar, and me, with our three years of articles, columns and posts, have provided more than enough evidence to give law enforcement authorities probable cause to open an investigation. Now would be the chance for law enforcement, and especially for Rep. Ilhan Omar’s House colleagues, to make a sincere stand against corruption and for the uniform application of the law.

David Steinberg was New York City Editor at PJMedia from 2009-2019, primarily handling coverage of Israel, homeland security, and political corruption. His investigation of Eric Cantor’s 2014 primary campaign is credited (ask Dave Brat!) with tipping the historic loss, perhaps the beginning of the “Trump Era.” As noted above, since 2018 Steinberg has published several articles of exclusive evidence covering Rep. Ilhan Omar’s past; they can be accessed here: https://bit.ly/2FJq529.

Follow David Steinberg on Twitter: https://twitter.com/realDSteinberg

 

David Steinberg: Tying up loose threads in the curious case

Robert Mueller’s Great Touch for Evil Expands!!

WHAT WAS MUELLER UP TO? HIS VICTIMS SPEAK

by Scott Johnson  at PowerLine:

Earlier this month RealClearPolitics posted Paul Sperry’s intensely reported account of the Mueller investigation from the perspective of its objects in “‘Scorched Earth’: Mueller’s Targets Speak Out.” Sperry prefaced his report:

Now that [Special Counsel Robert] Mueller has ended his probe finding no election collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia, 10 witnesses and targets of his sprawling, $35 million investigation agreed to speak with RealClearInvestigations because they no longer feel in legal jeopardy. They include several people who became household names during the two-year probe – including George Papadopoulos, Carter Page and Roger Stone – as well as lesser-known figures whose lives were also upended and finances imperiled when they came into Mueller’s crosshairs. Only three of the 10, Papadopoulos, Stone and a political consultant named Sam Patten, were charged with a crime. Patten received three years probation but no jail time for failing to register as a foreign agent; Papadopoulos served 12 days for lying to federal agents; and Stone awaits trial on false statements, witness-tampering and obstruction charges.

Their firsthand accounts pull back the curtain on the secret inner workings of the Mueller probe, revealing how the special counsel’s nearly two dozen prosecutors and 40 FBI agents used harshly aggressive tactics to pressure individuals to either cop to crimes or implicate others in felonies involving collusion.

Sperry’s mind-boggling account seems to have escaped attention. Is this the way it was supposed to go down? While some of the stories are familiar, they remain shocking. Moreover, several of the stories Sperry tells are unfamiliar. I learn from Sperry’s account that our old friend Michael Ledeen was caught up in the Mueller probe:

Mueller also targeted former Reagan official Michael Ledeen, who happened to co-author a book with retired Lt. Gen. Michael Flynn — “The Field of Fight: How We Can Win the Global War Against Radical Islam and Its Allies” — that was released during the 2016 campaign.

The Mueller report cites Ledeen as someone former Trump national security adviser Flynn spoke with before returning a call from the Russian ambassador during the presidential transition. It says he talked with Ledeen “for 20 minutes.” The report refers to “call records of Michael Ledeen,” followed by a redacted section related to grand jury action.

“That was a surprise to us,” said Ledeen’s wife, Barbara, a Senate Judiciary Committee aide who is also mentioned in the report.

“They went to the grand jury and got a subpoena to get my husband’s phone records and they got them and we never knew,” she fumed. “I guess it was because Michael wrote the book with Flynn.”

Neither Ledeen nor his wife were charged or even subjects in the investigation.

Michael’s experience is the least of it, but it is disgusting.

Quotable quote (Sam Patten): “He said Mueller’s team used the seldom-prosecuted [FARA] law to squeeze him for information about ‘this bullshit story about collusion.’ Agents first interviewed him last May, poring over his emails and texts, but came up dry. He said the fishing expedition wiped out his savings. He racked up some $140,000 in legal bills and had to cash out his retirement account. ‘I’m still digging my way out of the legal hole,’ Patten said.”

TOP 28 MOMENTS FROM BOMBSHELL GARR!

The idea of resisting a democratically elected president and…really changing the norms on the grounds that we have to stop this president, that is where the shredding of our norms and our institutions is occurring.’

Attorney General William Barr’s nearly hour-long interview with CBS News’ Jan Crawford last week was full of fascinating details about the special counsel probe, the debunked Russia collusion theory that roiled Washington for years, and Barr’s investigation into how the FBI and Department of Justice used the “bogus” theory to investigate the Trump campaign.

The interview was downplayed by the media, which is implicated in perpetuating the Russia hoax Barr is investigating, and which came in for criticism from Barr for its failure to care about violations of civil liberties. Here are the top 28 take-aways from the interview.

1. Mueller ‘Could Have Reached a Conclusion’

Crawford, whose questions revealed a command of the facts not demonstrated by many of her mainstream media peers, asked Barr about Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s decision to outline 11 instances where President Trump’s frustration at falsely being accused of treason could amount to “possible obstruction” followed by a refusal to decide whether they did.

Barr explained that the Office of Legal Counsel opinion that prevents presidents from being indicted was no barrier to making a conclusion about obstruction. “Right, he could have reached a conclusion,” Barr said, noting that he and Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein concluded that Trump had not obstructed justice.

“[W]hen he didn’t make a decision, the Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein and I felt it was necessary for us as the heads of the Department to reach that decision,” Barr said. “That is what the Department of Justice does, that is why we have the compulsory powers like a grand jury to force people to give us evidence so that we can determine whether a crime has committed and in order to legitimate the process we felt we had to reach a decision.”

2. DOJ Not an ‘Adjunct to Congress’

Mueller received praise from the media for, they said, subtly asking Congress to impeach the president for, apparently, his frustration with falsely being accused of being a traitor. Barr was less enamored of this idea.

“Well, I am not sure what he was suggesting but, you know, the Department of Justice doesn’t use our powers of investigating crimes as an adjunct to Congress. Congress is a separate branch of government and they can, you know, they have processes, we have our processes. Ours are related to the criminal justice process. We are not an extension of Congress’s investigative powers,” he said.

3. Mueller’s Guilty Until Proven Innocent Standard ‘Not The Standard We Use’ At DOJ

Mueller’s refusal to determine whether President Trump had obstructed justice by making hiring and firing decisions or complaining about false accusations he had conspired with Russia to steal the 2016 election was one problem. The other was that Mueller flipped the standard prosecutorial approach on its head, Barr said.

“[H]e also said that he could not say that the president clearly did not violate the law, which of course is not the standard we use at the department. We have to determine whether there is clear violation of the law, and so we applied the standards we would normally apply. We analyzed the law and the facts and a group of us spent a lot of time doing that and determined that both as a matter of law, many of the instances would not amount to obstruction,” Barr said.

4. Mueller’s Obstruction Theories ‘Did Not Reflect The Views’ of DOJ

Barr said the legal analysis in the special counsel’s obstruction report “did not reflect the views of the department” and were the “views of a particular lawyer or lawyers.” He went on to explain that firing James Comey, for example, is a “facially valid exercise of core presidential authority.”

Even if you don’t accept that presidents have the right to fire incompetent employees, to show obstruction the firing would have to have the probable effect of sabotaging a proceeding and be done with corrupt intent.

“[T]he report itself points out that one of the likely motivations here was the president’s frustration with Comey saying something publicly and saying a different thing privately and refusing to correct the record. So that would not have been a corrupt intent. So for each of these episodes we thought long and hard about it, we looked at the facts and we didn’t feel the government could establish obstruction in these cases,” Barr explained.

5. Barr Doesn’t Care about ‘Hyper-Partisan’ Complaints

Asked about the criticism he’s received from the media and other partisans, Barr said, “Well, we live in a hyper-partisan age where people no longer really pay attention to the substance of what’s said but as to who says it and what side they’re on and what it’s political ramifications are. The Department of Justice is all about the law, and the facts and the substance, and I’m going to make the decisions based on the law and the facts. And I realize that’s in tension with the political climate we live in because people are more interested in getting their way politically. so I think it just goes with the territory of being the attorney general in a hyper-partisan period of time.”

6. Barr ‘Surprised’ by Mueller Not Providing Report Ready to Release

Barr explained that he wrote a four-page summary of Mueller’s 400-page report because Mueller failed to provide a report that was ready to release to the American public. In conversations in the weeks leading up to Mueller’s report delivery, Barr repeatedly requested that the grand jury information be highlighted so it could be quickly redacted by Justice Department officials.

Instead, the report included no highlighting of which portions were from grand jury information, which must be redacted by law. That meant it would be weeks before the report would be made public, at a time when former intelligence officials were making false claims about the Mueller report.

Barr said he wrote the four-page summary:

because I didn’t think the body politic would allow us to go on radio silence for four weeks. I mean, people were camped outside my house and the department and every — there was all kinds of wild speculation going on. Former senior intelligence officials who were purporting to have it, or intimating that they had inside information were suggesting that the president and his family were going to be indicted and so forth. Saying that publicly. There was all kind of wild and — Yes, and it was wild and irresponsible speculation going on which the very — Right, and talking heads and things like that, and these things affect the United States’ ability to function in the world.

We have an economy. It could affect the economy. It can affect, it can affect our foreign relations during very delicate period of time with, you know, serious adversaries in the world. So I felt that in order to buy time, in order to get the report out, I had to state the bottom line just like you’re announcing a verdict in a case. My purpose there was not to summarize every jot and tittle of the report and every, you know, angle that, that Mueller looked into. But, just state the bottom line, which I did in the four-page memo.

7. Mueller Letter Complaining About Lack of Impeachment Narrative Was ‘A Little Snitty and Staff-Driven’

Someone within the special counsel’s office leaked to The New York Times a letter complaining that Barr’s four-page summary set the media narrative differently than they would have preferred. Barr said he was surprised Mueller “didn’t pick up the phone and call me given our 30-year relationship” and that he felt “the letter was a little snitty and staff-driven.” He reiterated his preference to have the full report released so that everyone could determine “what Bob’s reasoning was.”

8. No ‘Discrepancy’ on OLC Opinion

In a press conference, and in his report, Mueller claimed to believe that an Office of Legal Counsel opinion about presidents not being able to be indicted meant that he couldn’t even analyze whether Trump’s frustration at years of false allegations that he was a traitor constituted obstruction.

Previously, Barr said Mueller had assured him that the OLC opinion had not been the reason he hadn’t determined Trump obstructed justice. The two put out a joint statement saying that there was no discrepancy between what they were saying. Barr explained that Mueller did not even analyze whether there was a crime.

9. Response to Russia Threats Troubling

If intelligence officials were “alarmed” by the Russia threats as early as April 2016, as they claimed, “Surely the response should have been more than just, you know, dangling a confidential informant in front of a peripheral player in the Trump campaign.”

10. FBI’s Wray ‘Very Supportive’ of Investigation Into Russia Probe

Barr said he and FBI Director Christopher Wray have “discussed how important it is that that not be allowed to happen and we are both very cognizant of that … he is being very supportive and we’re working together on, you know, trying to reconstruct what happened. People have to understand, you know, one of the things here is that these efforts in 2016, these counter-intelligence activities that were directed at the Trump campaign, were not done in the normal course and not through the normal procedures as a far as I can tell. And a lot of the people who were involved are no longer there.”

11. Spying Is Spying

Crawford noted that Barr has received criticism for referring to the widespread surveillance of the Trump campaign as “spying.” Barr responded, “Yeah, I mean, I guess it’s become a dirty word somehow. It hasn’t ever been for me. I think there is nothing wrong with spying, the question is always whether it is authorized by law and properly predicated and if it is, then it’s an important tool the United States has to protect the country.”

12. Words Don’t Need to Be Retired Because Trump Uses Them

“[S]ome former intelligence chiefs have said that the president has made that word somewhat pejorative, that there is spying, this is a witch hunt, this is a hoax, and so your use of that word makes it seem that you are being a loyalist,” Crawford said. Barr responded, “You know, it’s part of the craziness of the modern day that if a president uses a word, then all of a sudden it becomes off bounds. It’s a perfectly good English word, I will continue to use it.”

13. Law Enforcement and Intelligence Should Not Meddle In Elections

“And look, I think if we — we are worried about foreign influence in the campaign? We should be because the heart of our system is the peaceful transfer of power through elections and what gives the government legitimacy is that process. And if foreign elements can come in and affect it, that’s bad for the republic,” Barr said.

“But by the same token, it’s just as, it’s just as dangerous to the continuation of self-government and our republican system, republic that we not allow government power, law enforcement or intelligence power, to play a role in politics, to intrude into politics, and affect elections,” Barr said. Asked which interference is more troubling, Barr said they both are.

14. Government Officials Should Not Become a ‘Praetorian Guard’

When discussing actions taken against the Trump campaign, Barr referenced the Roman Army’s elite unit that interfered in politics, even overthrowing emperors.

“[R]epublics have fallen because of Praetorian Guard mentality, where government officials get very arrogant, they identify the national interest with their own political preferences and they feel that anyone who has a different opinion, you know, is somehow an enemy of the state. And you know, there is that tendency that they know better and that, you know, they’re there to protect as guardians of the people. That can easily translate into essentially supervening the will of the majority and getting your own way as a government official.”

15. Use of Spy Tools Against Political Campaigns a ‘Serious Red Line’

Asked if he was concerned that a Praetorian Guard mentality had set in in 2016, Barr said, “Well, I just think it has to be carefully looked at because the use of foreign intelligence capabilities and counterintelligence capabilities against an American political campaign to me is unprecedented and it’s a serious red line that’s been crossed.”

16. AG Must Protect Against Abuse of Government Power

“[O]ne of the key responsibilities of the attorney general, core responsibilities of the attorney general is to make sure that government power is not abused and that the right of Americans are not transgressed by abusive government power,” Barr said. “That’s the responsibility of the attorney general.”

17. Looking Into Process for Counterintelligence Activities Against Trump Campaign

In a sea of media complacency about the use of counterintelligence activities against the Trump campaign, Barr seeks answers.

I think it’s important to understand what basis there was for launching counterintelligence activities against a political campaign, which is the core of our … First Amendment liberties in this country. And what was the predicate for it? What was the hurdle that had to be crossed? What was the process- who had to approve it? And including the electronic surveillance, whatever electronic surveillance was done. And was everyone operating in their proper lane? … And we’re working closely with the intelligence agencies, the bureau and the agency and others to help us reconstruct what happened. And I want to see, what were the standards that were applied. What was the evidence? What were the techniques used? Who approved them? Was there a legitimate basis for it?

18. Details on Other Investigations

Barr explained that the inspector general is only looking “at a discrete area that is — that is you know, important, which is the use of electronic surveillance that was targeted at Carter Page.” Page endured a year of heavy surveillance from the federal government, which told a secret court that he was an agent of Russia. The year of surveillance found no crimes committed by Page, who is now suing to restore his reputation.

Barr explained that he didn’t have the inspector general expand his probe to cover the other areas because of his limited powers: “He doesn’t have the power to compel testimony, he doesn’t have the power really to investigate beyond the current cast of characters at the Department of Justice. His ability to get information from former officials or from other agencies outside the department is very limited.”

Of John Huber, the U.S. attorney who was reportedly looking at FISA abuse, Barr said he “stood back and put that on hold while the Office of Inspector General was conducting its review,” only waiting for criminal referrals. However, Barr said he’s also working on issues that “relate to Hillary Clinton” and are concluding.

19. Media Supposed to Be ‘Watchdogs’ of ‘Our Civil Liberties’

Barr said that when he joined the Central Intelligence Agency 50 years ago during the Vietnam and Civil Rights era, there was a ton of concern about investigation of domestic political activities.

[W]hen was it appropriate for intelligence agencies, the FBI too was under investigation. You know, the penetration of civil rights groups because at the time there was concerns about contacts with, you know, communist funded front groups and things like that and you know how deeply could you get into civil rights groups or anti-Vietnam war groups. A lot of these groups were in contact with foreign adversaries, they had some contact with front organizations and so forth and there were a lot of rules put in place and those rules are under the attorney general. The attorney general’s responsibility is to make sure that these powers are not used to tread upon First Amendment activity and that certainly was a big part of my formative years of dealing with those issues. The fact that today people just seem to brush aside the idea that it is okay to you know, to engage in these activities against a political campaign is stunning to me especially when the media doesn’t seem to think that it’s worth looking into. They’re supposed to be the watchdogs of, you know, our civil liberties.

20. Answers on Trump Campaign Surveillance Not ‘Satisfactory’

Barr declined to weigh in on specifics, but said, “Like many other people who are familiar with intelligence activities, I had a lot of questions about what was going on. I assumed I’d get answers when I went in and I have not gotten answers that are well satisfactory, and in fact probably have more questions, and that some of the facts that, that I’ve learned don’t hang together with the official explanations of what happened.”

Pressed to explain further, Barr said, “That’s all I really will say. Things are just not jiving.”

21. Failures Not in Rank and File But ‘Upper Echelon’

Barr had previously said that the abnormal procedures taken against the Trump campaign didn’t take place among the rank and file of the bureau, but among the upper echelon. Asked to explain, he said, “Because I think the activities were undertaken by a small group at the top which is one of the, probably one of the mistakes that has been made instead of running this as a normal bureau investigation or counterintelligence investigation. It was done by the executives at the senior level. Out of headquarters.”

22. 2016 Meddling ‘Antithetical to the Democratic System’

Barr was generous about the wrongdoing perpetrated by government actors, saying no one may have intended to undermine the republic by surveilling political opponents.

I’m not suggesting that people did what they did necessarily because of conscious, nefarious motives. Sometimes people can convince themselves that what they’re doing is in the higher interest, the better good. They don’t realize that what they’re doing is really antithetical to the democratic system that we have. They start viewing themselves as the guardians of the people that are more informed and insensitive than everybody else. They can — in their own mind, they can have those kinds of motives. And sometimes they can look at evidence and facts through a biased prism that they themselves don’t realize.

Barr did not specifically cite fired FBI director Comey, whose 2018 defense of his tenure is titled “A Higher Loyalty: Truth, Lies, and Leadership.” Comey was strongly criticized in an inspector general report for failing to follow departmental procedures in his handling of the Hillary Clinton case regarding mishandling classified information.

Barr said of those who justify their actions, “That something objectively as applied as a neutral principle across the board really, you know, shouldn’t be the standard used in the case but because they have a particular bias they don’t see that. So that’s why procedures and standards are important and review afterward is an important way of making sure that government power is being conscientiously and properly applied. It doesn’t necessarily mean that there are people — you know, that people have crossed lines have done so with corrupt intent or anything like that.”

23. ‘Gross Bias’ of FBI Agents ‘Appalling,’ Would Be Roundly Condemned If about Obama

Barr said of the virulently anti-Trump texts that have been previously released:

Well it’s hard to read some of the texts with and not feel that there was gross bias at work and they’re appalling…. Those were appalling. And on their face they were very damning and I think if the shoe was on the other foot we could be hearing a lot about it. If those kinds of discussions were held you know when Obama first ran for office, people talking about Obama in those tones and suggesting that ‘Oh that he might be a Manchurian candidate for Islam or something like that.’ You know some wild accusations like that and you had that kind of discussion back and forth, you don’t think we would be hearing a lot more about it?

24. Russia Collusion Conspiracy Theory Was ‘Bogus’

Crawford said Comey may say the investigation into Trump had to be closely held because it was so extraordinary. Barr said, “Well it might be legit under certain circumstances but a lot of that has to do with how good the evidence was at that point. And you know Mueller has spent two and half years and the fact is there is no evidence of a conspiracy. So it was bogus, this whole idea that the Trump was in cahoots with the Russians is bogus.”

25. Media In No Place to ‘Wring Hands’ about Barr’s Declassification Authority

Barr said that he asked President Trump for the authority to declassify documents dealing with the Russia investigation, as well as the direction that other agencies support his efforts to investigate the probe. He said the other agencies are being supportive.

Of media concerns about the transparency, Barr said,

I’m amused by these people who make a living by disclosing classified information, including the names of intelligence operatives, wringing their hands about whether I’m going to be responsible in protecting intelligence sources and methods. I’ve been in the business, as I’ve said, for over 50 years, long before they were born and I know how to handle classified information and I believe strongly in protecting intelligence sources and methods. But at the same time if there is information that can be shared with the American people without jeopardizing intelligence sources and methods that decision should be made and because I will be involved in finding out what the story was I think I’m in the best decision to make that decision.

He said the media reaction is strange. “Normally the media would be interested in letting the sunshine in and finding out what the truth is. And usually the media doesn’t care that much about protecting intelligence sources and methods. But I do and I will.”

26. Barr Expected Criticism for Upholding Rule of Law

Crawford noted Barr’s sterling reputation before he began his second round as attorney general. He previously served in the George H.W. Bush administration. He said he expected criticism from partisans.

I realize we live in a crazy hyper-partisan period of time and I knew that it would only be a matter of time if I was behaving responsibly and calling them as I see them, that I would be attacked because nowadays people don’t care about the merits and the substance. They only care about who it helps, who benefits, whether my side benefits or the other side benefits, everything is gauged by politics. And as I say, that’s antithetical to the way the department runs, and any attorney general in this period is going to end up losing a lot of political capital, and I realize that and that is one of the reasons that I ultimately was persuaded that I should take it on because I think at my stage in life it really doesn’t make any difference.

27. ‘Everyone Dies’

Asked if he worried about his reputation, Barr said, “Yeah, but everyone dies and I am not, you know, I don’t believe in the Homeric idea that you know, immortality comes by, you know, having odes sung about you over the centuries, you know?” He added that he didn’t regret taking the job.

28. Resistance Is ‘Shredding Our Institutions’

Barr said he’d rather be back to his old life, but that he loves the Justice Department and the FBI: “I think it’s important that we not, in this period of intense partisan feeling, destroy our institutions. I think one of the ironies today is that people are saying that it’s President Trump that’s shredding our institutions. I really see no evidence of that — it is hard, and I really haven’t seen bill of particulars as to how that’s being done. From my perspective, the idea of resisting a democratically elected president and basically throwing everything at him and, you know, really changing the norms on the grounds that we have to stop this president, that is where the shredding of our norms and our institutions is occurring.”

Mollie Ziegler Hemingway is a senior editor at The Federalist. She is Senior Journalism Fellow at Hillsdale College and a Fox News contributor. Follow her on Twitter at @mzhemingway

 

https://thefederalist.com/2019/06/03/top-28-moments-from-bombshell-barr-interview/

The American Feminist Fascist Drive to Expand the Murder of the Human Child!

LCMS President’s statement regarding gubernatorial actions expanding abortion in New York, Illinois

by Rev. Dr. Matthew Harrison

Contact: Pamela Nielsen
Media Relations, The Lutheran Church—Missouri Synod
314-996-1215
pamela.nielsen@lcms.org
www.lcms.org

A statement from the Rev. Dr. Matthew Harrison, president of The Lutheran Church—Missouri Synod, in response to recent gubernatorial actions expanding abortion in New York and Illinois.


“In him was life, and the life was the light of men” (John 1:4).

On Jan. 22, 2019, the 46th anniversary of the Roe v. Wade Supreme Court decision legalizing abortion on demand, the governors of both New York and Illinois signed laws to extend and promote abortion.

As he signed the Reproductive Health Act into law, New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo described it as the “evolution” of humankind in America. In Illinois, Gov. J.B. Pritzker signed an executive order to ensure taxpayer funding of abortions, saying that it would make his state “the most progressive … in terms of women’s reproductive rights.”

Life, not death, is the goal of humanity. History testifies that death is never the means through which justice and human rights prevail. We do not advance on the graves of our children. Germany, which sought eugenics as the solution to problems, now has strict abortion laws. To defend and support life is the goal of every just government, and the right to life is the hallmark of a good society.

Yet abortion laws have allowed the abortion of more than 61,000,000 children since Roe v. Wade. That’s nearly 50 times the number of American soldiers killed in all wars. The abortion industry and its proponents take great lengths to avoid facing the fact that abortion dismembers a living child in a horrid pool of its own blood. This is barbaric.

Abortion is a lie. Science is on the side of life. We shall stand against the barbarism of abortion until our dying breath. Abortion is illogical, as we slaughter babies in the womb while developing ever-better care for other unborn children. Abortion contradicts the natural law written on human hearts that teaches us it is wrong to kill.

Lawmakers and bureaucrats in our country have become emboldened to force citizens to go against their conscience. People publicly celebrate laws that lead to the deaths of children.

How long, O Lord, how long?

Our Christian faith teaches us to value life and to love each and every person as our neighbor. Love is life, and life is the great gift of love. Death is our natural enemy. This can be seen in our lives and in our world each day. Even the birds that seek food in winter testify that life is the goal of their movements and their work. The flowers that grow toward the sun seek the light that enlivens them. We all live under God, who grants life to His whole creation.

And in the giving of His Son to be the Savior, God shows that He is the Lord of life. Jesus came to love. He taught us to love all people, including those whom we consider our enemies. He taught us to unconditionally love every person, even those whom this world considers unworthy of love.

Jesus not only taught us to love. He brought healing and wholeness to the broken. He proclaimed peace to those who were troubled. He sat with those who were excluded. He lifted up those who were beaten down. But most of all, He loved through the sacrifice of His own life on the cross. He died to forgive the sins of all humanity. His forgiveness is a free gift for all who trust in Him, including those who suffer from guilt for aborting their child. He rose on the third day.

The resurrection of Jesus is God’s grand statement that life is the goal of this creation. The resurrection of Jesus proclaims that all creatures find the goal of their existence in life. Just as God raised Jesus from the dead, so we learn that God treasures life over death.

We live as citizens in this world, and we seek to be obedient to our nation’s laws. We thank God for our leaders and for this great land He has given to us and for its precious freedoms and opportunities. The Lutheran Church—Missouri Synod advocates strong citizenship and active participation in government. We obey the laws of our land and encourage those around us to do so.

We are, however, bound by our conscience to speak against those laws that are unjust and, especially, those laws that violate God’s law and the natural law that binds all mankind. Abortion and other means through which humans kill humans violate these natural and moral laws that form the foundation of society.

Therefore, we stand against these actions and against all laws that sanction abortion or the taking of innocent life. We cannot stand silent when people elected to positions in which they are to protect citizens continue to pass laws and advocate for legislation that undermines the sanctity of human life. Our conscience is bound by both the Word of God and reason to speak for life as a precious gift of God and to speak against any and all who promote the killing of unborn children. We cannot hide the evil of these laws under the banner of “rights” or “privilege.” Children’s lives are at stake. They cannot speak for themselves. We will speak for them, and we will work to protect their lives.

And we will continue to work to love and support the women who face difficult choices or suffer from the consequences of abortion. We support young mothers who have chosen life for their children. We work to provide adoption and other opportunities to care for children in need. And we continue to show God’s mercy to all, just as He, in Jesus, has mercy on all.

We will work, love and pray that all might know the love of Jesus and trust in Him for salvation. “In him was life, and the life was the light of men” (John 1:4).

Rev. Dr. Matthew C. Harrison, President
The Lutheran Church—Missouri Synod


Updated Feb. 12, 2019

At its meeting on Feb. 7, the LCMS Council of Presidents and the LCMS Praesidium unanimously voted to sign their names to President Harrison’s statement. The names and districts/regions are listed below.

Council of Presidents

Rev. Derek G. Lecakes
Atlantic District
Rev. Dr. Anthony J. Steinbronn
New Jersey District
Rev. Michael R. Lange
California/Nevada/Hawaii District
Rev. Arie Bertsch
North Dakota District
Rev. Mark A. Miller
Central Illinois District
Rev. Dwayne M. Lueck
North Wisconsin District
Rev. Dr. Chris C. Wicher
Eastern District
Rev. Dr. Allan R. Buss
Northern Illinois District
Rev. Dr. Jamison J. Hardy
English District
Rev. Dr. Paul A. Linnemann
Northwest District
Rev. Dr. Gregory S. Walton
Florida-Georgia District
Rev. Dr. Kevin A. Wilson
Ohio District
Rev. Dr. Daniel J. Brege
Indiana District
Rev. Barrie E. Henke
Oklahoma District
Rev. Dr. Brian S. Saunders
Iowa District East
Rev. Dr. Michael E. Gibson
Pacific Southwest District
Rev. Dr. Steven D. Turner
Iowa District West
Rev. Roger E. Schlechte
Rocky Mountain District
Rev. Peter K. Lange
Kansas District
Rev. Waldemar R. Vinovskis
SELC District
Rev. Dr. David P. E. Maier
Michigan District
Rev. Scott C. Sailer
South Dakota District
Rev. Dr. Roger C. Paavola
Mid-South District
Rev. Dr. John C. Wille
South Wisconsin District
Rev. Donald J. Fondow
Minnesota North District
Rev. Dr. John R. Denninger
Southeastern District
Rev. Dr. Lucas V. Woodford
Minnesota South District
Rev. Eric C. Johnson
Southern District
Rev. Dr. Robert Lee Hagan
Missouri District
Rev. Timothy J. Scharr
Southern Illinois District
Rev. Terry R. Forke
Montana District
Rev. Michael W. Newman
Texas District
Rev. Richard L. Snow
Nebraska District
Rev. John E. Hill
Wyoming District
Rev. Timothy Yeadon
New England District

Praesidium

Rev. Dr. Herbert C. Mueller
First Vice-President
Rev. Dr. John C. Wohlrabe, Jr.
Fourth Vice-President
Great Lakes Region
Rev. Dr. Scott R. Murray
Second Vice-President
West-Southwest Region
Rev. Dr. Daniel Preus
Fifth Vice-President
Central Region
Rev. Nabil S. Nour
Third Vice-President
Great Plains Region
Rev. Christopher Esget
Sixth Vice-President
East–Southeast Region

 

LCMS President’s statement regarding gubernatorial actions expanding abortion in New York, Illinois

Michelle Obama’s Former Chief of Staff, Tina Tchen, Appears in Smollett Case Trouble

Something making Michelle Obama’s ex-chief of staff Tina Tchen nervous about that Smollett case?

by Monica Showalter  at  American Thinker:
.

If anyone ever needed a proxy indicator of sorts to get a sense if some miscreant is guilty of something or not, well, acting guiltily is often that indicator. Cops look for this all the time.

That’s what Michelle Obama’s former chief of staff, Tina Tchen, is doing, avoiding process servers from a Chicago-based special counsel charged with finding out if some untoward influence was used in the Jussie Smollett hoax case and the even stranger decision of Chicago district attorney Kim Foxx to let him off the hook. Here’s Fox News:

Officials are trying to get to the bottom of it, asking Tchen (who made phone calls to Foxx) to testify and she won’t take her papers from process servers, she’s just deluding herself that they will go away. She’d rather not answer any questions about why Justin Smollett got off scot free.

Slink, slink, hide, hide, gotta get away from those process servers, who are staking themselves out behind every bush like repo men. I know what this is like from the process server end: in San Francisco in the 1980s, I actually used to be a process server. People like Tchen to us, were colloquially known as ‘dirtbags’ because they wouldn’t take their papers, but they never did get away with not eventually getting their papers. They just wasted our time.

It raises questions about what she doesn’t want to testify about. Can it be that something other than justice was served as Smollett walked? Why is she running scared?

 

https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2019/05/something_making_michelle_obamas_exchief_of_staff_tina_tchen_nervous_about_that_smollett_case.html

Exposing the True Corruption at Comey’s FBI Begins

State Department’s Red flag on Steele went to a Senior FBI man Well before FISA Warrant

In all Washington investigations, the essential questions become who knew it and when did they know it.

In the case of FBI informant Christopher Steele and the credibility of his now-disproven Russia collusion allegations against Donald Trump, we have some important clarity: Government officials confirm that an October 2016 email revealing that Steele met with State Department officials — a breach of protocol for an informant if it was unauthorized — was sent to an FBI counterintelligence supervisor.

Multiple sources confirm to me that the recipient of the State Department email was Special Agent Stephen Laycock, then the FBI’s section chief for Eurasian counterintelligence and now one of the bureau’s top executives as the assistant director for intelligenceunder Director Christopher Wray.

The email to Laycock from Deputy Assistant Secretary of State Kathleen Kavalec arrived eight days before the FBI swore to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court that it had no derogatory information on Steele and used his anti-Trump dossier to secure a secret surveillance warrant to investigate Trump’s possible ties to Moscow.

Officials tell me that Laycock immediately forwarded the information he received about Steele on Oct. 13, 2016, to the FBI team leading the Trump-Russia investigation, headed by then-fellow Special Agent Peter Strzok.

Laycock was the normal point of contact for Kavalec on Eurasian counterintelligence matters, and he simply acted as a conduit to get the information to his colleagues supervising the Russia probe, the officials added.

The officials declined to say what the FBI did with the information about Steele after it reached Strzok’s team, or what the email specifically revealed. A publicly disclosed version of the email has been heavily redacted in the name of national security.

While much remains to be answered, the email exchange means FBI supervisors knew Steele had contact with State and had reason to inquire what he was saying before they sought the warrant. If they had inquired, agents would have learned Steele had admitted to Kavalec he had been leaking to the news media, had a political deadline of Election Day to get his information public and had provided demonstrably false intelligence in one case, as I reported last week.

Current and former FBI officials told me it would be a red flag for an FBI informant on a sensitive counterintelligence case such as Russia to go talking about his evidence with another federal agency without authorization.

Kevin Brock, the former FBI assistant director for intelligence, said the State Department’s email in October 2016 ordinarily should have triggered the FBI to reevaluate Steele as a source.

“This is quite important,” Brock said. “Under normal circumstances, when you get information about the conduct of your source that gives rise to questions about their reliability or truthfulness, you usually go back and reevaluate their dependability and credibility.

“It doesn’t always mean immediate discontinuation of the source. But there are policy requirements that you exercise some form of prudence, and conduct further vetting to determine whether this source can be utilized going forward. This is particularly true if the source’s information is being used in an affidavit or some other legal process.”

FBI confidential sources such as Steele sign a confidentiality agreement and undergo a training session on the do’s and don’ts of informing, an event known in intelligence parlance as an “admonishment.” FBI records show Steele underwent “admonishment” training and signed an acknowledgement on Feb. 2, 2016.

The FBI fired Steele as an informant on Nov. 1, 2016, claiming he was caught leaking to the news media. But by that time Steele’s intelligence already had been used as the main evidence to secure a Federal Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) warrant against the Trump campaign on Oct. 21, 2016.

The public version of Kavalec’s email blacked out Laycock’s name as the recipient and listed an attachment file when it was delivered last month to the conservative group Citizens United under an open records request. The blacked-out version contained only a single visible sentence, in which Kavalec wrote the FBI supervisor: “You may already have this information but wanted to pass it on just in case.”

Officials familiar with Kavalec’s email would only describe the contents as having to do with something Steele told the State Department during an Oct. 11, 2016, visit. They said the attachment was not a copy of Steele’s now-infamous dossier or a complete set of Kavalec’s typed notes from her conversation with the informant. Rather, they say, it was information Steele shared with Kavalec that she felt needed to be transmitted to the bureau.

The officials also declined to address another mystery that has caught congressional investigators’ attention: Kavalec had two exchanges with FBI officials about Steele approximately two weeks before her meeting. The email contacts on Sept. 29-30, 2016, have been redacted, except for a single phrase “Thank you Kathy.” Congressional investigators want to know if the earlier exchange resulted in Kavalec learning in advance of Steele’s work for the FBI, or was a further tipoff to the FBI of Steele’s intention to visit State, a department where he had offered pro bono information in the past.

An FBI spokeswoman declined comment. Laycock did not respond to phone and email requests for comment. State officials declined to discuss the documents.

Republican House and Senate investigators who spent two years reviewing the Russia case say they were not provided the details of Kavalec’s contact with Steele or told about the existence of her handwritten and typed notes.

Lawmakers believe the new memos provide additional evidence Steele was unsuitable to be an informant before his dossier was used to justify a FISA warrant.

Their concern is heightened by the fact that Steele was working simultaneously as an FBI informant and as a paid researcher for Fusion GPS, the firm hired by Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign and the Democratic National Committee (DNC) to find Russia dirt on Trump in hopes of defeating him in the election.

Congressional Republicans have said publicly for months that the FBI failed to adequately inform FISA judges that Steele was working for Trump’s rival and had a bias against the GOP nominee, or that his dossier was unverified and contained demonstrably false information.

Defenders of the FBI have countered that there isn’t evidence to prove the bureau knew Steele was leaking to the media or was hired by the Clinton campaign and the DNC until after the FISA warrant was filed.

John Solomon is an award-winning investigative journalist whose work over the years has exposed U.S. and FBI intelligence failures before the Sept. 11 attacks, federal scientists’ misuse of foster children and veterans in drug experiments, and numerous cases of political corruption. He serves as an investigative columnist and executive vice president for video at The Hill. Follow him on Twitter @jsolomonReports.

 

https://thehill.com/opinion/white-house/443710-state-departments-red-flag-on-steele-went-to-a-senior-fbi-man-well-before

The Moeller, Comey, Rosenstein, and Hillary Stench…..THE CRIMINAL PLOT THICKENS

Well now………
Image may contain: 5 people, text
 
 
Tom Tancredo Post – MUST READ
.
THE PLOT THICKENS
…..(Article sent by California friend and  conservative, Lisa Rich.)
.
I am passing this on from someone who’s
connecting some dots with input from sources he
cannot reveal.
Here’s what it looks like when all the pieces are
sewn together
It smells like conspiracy and treason. Everyone
needs to read this. Slowly, and patiently, because
it’s very important……
From 2001 to 2005 there was an ongoing
investigation into the Clinton Foundation.
A Grand Jury had been impaneled.
Governments from around the world had donated to
the “Charity”.
Yet, from 2001 to 2003 none of those “Donations”
to the Clinton Foundation were declared. Now you
would think that an honest investigator would be able
to figure this out.
.
Look who took over this investigation in 2005:
None other than James Comey; Coincidence? Guess who
was transferred into the Internal Revenue Service to
run the Tax Exemption Branch of the IRS? None other
than, Lois “Be on The Look Out” (BOLO) Lerner. Isn’t
that interesting?
But this is all just a series of strange
coincidences, right?
Guess who ran the Tax Division inside the
Department of Injustice from 2001 to 2005?
No other than the Assistant Attorney General of
the United States, Rod Rosenstein.
.
Guess who was the Director of the Federal Bureau
of Investigation during this time frame?
Another coincidence (just an anomaly in
statistics and chances), but it was Robert Mueller.
.
What do all four casting characters have in common?
They all were briefed and/or were front-line
investigators into the Clinton Foundation Investigation.
Another coincidence, right?
.
Fast forward to 2009….
James Comey leaves the Justice Department to go
and cash-in at Lockheed Martin.
Hillary Clinton is running the State Department,
official government business, on her own personal
email server.
The Uranium One “issue” comes to the attention of
the Hillary.
Like all good public servants do, supposedly
looking out for America’s best interest, she decides
to support the decision and approve the sale of 20%
of US Uranium to no other than, the Russians.
.
Now you would think that this is a fairly
straight up deal, except it wasn’t, America got
absolutely nothing out of it.
However, prior to the sales approval, no other
than Bill Clinton goes to Moscow, gets paid 500K for
a one hour speech; then meets with Vladimir Putin at
his home for a few hours.
Ok, no big deal right? Well, not so fast, the FBI
had a mole inside the money laundering and bribery
scheme.
.
Robert Mueller was the FBI Director during this
time frame? Yep, He even delivered a Uranium Sample
to Moscow in 2009.
Who was handling that case within the Justice
Department out of the US Attorney’s Office in Maryland?
None other than, Rod Rosenstein. And what
happened to the informant?
The Department of Justice placed a GAG order on
him and threatened to lock him up if he spoke out
about it.
How does 20% of the most strategic asset of the
United States of America end up in Russian hands when
the FBI has an informant, a mole providing inside
information to the FBI on the criminal enterprise?
Very soon after; the sale was approved!~145
million dollars in “donations” made their way into
the Clinton Foundation from entities directly
connected to the Uranium One deal.
Guess who was still at the Internal Revenue
Service working the Charitable Division? None other
than, – Lois Lerner.
.
Ok, that’s all just another series of
coincidences, nothing to see here, right?
Let’s fast forward to 2015.
Due to a series of tragic events in Benghazi and
after the 9 “investigations” the House, Senate and at
State Department, Trey Gowdy who was running the 10th
investigation as Chairman of the Select Committee on
Benghazi discovers that the Hillary ran the State
Department on an unclassified, unauthorized, outlaw
personal email server.He also discovered that none of
those emails had been turned over when she departed
her “Public Service” as Secretary of State which was
required by law. He also discovered that there was
Top Secret information contained within her
personally archived email.
.
Sparing you the State Departments cover up, the
nostrums they floated, the delay tactics that were
employed and the outright lies that were spewed forth
from the necks of the Kerry State Department, we
shall leave it with this…… they did everything
humanly possible to cover for Hillary.
.
Now this is amazing, guess who became FBI
Director in 2013? None other than James Comey; who
secured 17 no bid contracts for his employer
(Lockheed Martin) with the State Department and was
rewarded with a six million dollar thank you present
when he departed his employer? Amazing how all those
no-bids just went right through at State, huh?
Now he is the FBI Director in charge of the
“Clinton Email Investigation” after of course his FBI
Investigates the Lois Lerner “Matter” at the Internal
Revenue Service and he exonerates her. Nope….
couldn’t find any crimes there.
In April 2016, James Comey drafts an exoneration
letter of Hillary Rodham Clinton, meanwhile the DOJ
is handing out immunity deals like candy.They didn’t
even convene a Grand Jury!
Like a lightning bolt of statistical
impossibility, like a miracle from God himself, like
the true “Gangsta” Comey is, James steps out into the
cameras of an awaiting press conference on July the
5th of 2016, and exonerates the Hillary from any
wrongdoing.
.
Do you see the pattern?
.
It goes on and on, Rosenstein becomes Asst.
Attorney General,Comey gets fired based upon a letter
by Rosenstein, Comey leaks government information to
the press, Mueller is assigned to the Russian
Investigation sham by Rosenstein to provide cover for
decades of malfeasance within the FBI and DOJ and the
story continues.
FISA Abuse, political espionage….. pick a
crime, any crime, chances are…… this group and a
few others did it:
.
All the same players.
All compromised and conflicted.
All working fervently to NOT go to jail themselves
All connected in one way or another to the Clinton’s.
They are like battery acid; they corrode and
corrupt everything they touch.How many lives have
these two destroyed?
As of this writing, the Clinton Foundation, in
its 20+ years of operation of being the largest
International Charity Fraud in the history of
mankind, has never been audited by the Internal
Revenue Service.
.
Let us not forget that Comey’s brother works for
DLA Piper, the law firm that does the Clinton
Foundation’s taxes.
The person that is the common denominator to all
the crimes above and still doing her evil escape
legal maneuvers at the top of the 3 Letter USA Agencies?
Yep, that would be Hillary R. Clinton.
Now who is LISA BARSOOMIAN? Let’s learn a little
about Mrs. Lisa H. Barsoomian’s background.
.
Lisa H. Barsoomian, an Attorney that graduated
from Georgetown Law, is a protégé of James Comey and
Robert Mueller.
Barsoomian, with her boss R. Craig Lawrence,
represented Bill Clinton in 1998.
Lawrence also represented:
Robert Mueller three times;
James Comey five times;
Barack Obama 45 times;
Kathleen Sebelius 56 times;
Bill Clinton 40 times; and
Hillary Clinton 17 times.
Between 1998 and 2017, Barsoomian herself
represented the FBI at least five times.
You may be saying to yourself, OK, who cares? Who
cares about the work history of this Barsoomian woman?
Apparently, someone does, because someone out
there cares so much that they’ve “purged” all
Barsoomian court documents for her Clinton
representation in Hamburg vs. Clinton in 1998 and its
appeal in 1999 from the DC District and Appeals Court
dockets (?). Someone out there cares so much that
even the internet has been “purged” of all
information pertaining to Barsoomian.
Historically, this indicates that the individual
is a protected CIA operative. Additionally, Lisa
Barsoomian has specialized in opposing Freedom of
Information Act requests on behalf of the
intelligence community. Although Barsoomian has been
involved in hundreds of cases representing the DC
Office of the US Attorney, her email address is Lisa
Barsoomian@NIH.gov. The NIH stands for National
Institutes of Health. This is a tactic routinely used
by the CIA to protect an operative by using another
government organization to shield their activities.
It’s a cover, so big deal right? What does one
more attorney with ties to the US intelligence
community really matter?
.
It deals with Trump and his recent tariffs on
Chinese steel and aluminum imports, the border wall,
DACA, everything coming out of California, the
Uni-party unrelenting opposition to President Trump,
the Clapper leaks, the Comey leaks, Attorney General
Jeff Sessions recusal and subsequent 14 month nap
with occasional forays into the marijuana
legalization mix …. and last but not least Mueller’s
never-ending investigation into collusion between the
Trump team and the Russians.
.
Why does Barsoomian, CIA operative, merit any
mention?
.
BECAUSE….
She is Assistant Attorney General Rod
Rosenstein’s WIFE!

Why is the JudeoChristian God MALE!?

Note from Glenn:

Dennis Prager has come out with his Judeic reason, reasons for why our JudeoChristian God is MALE in concept.   His listing is rational, believable, and quite acceptable among rational human animals interested if the reasons of life and the unknown of death of the human body and mind.

Please click on below to absorb the rational behind his truths.

There are other cultural worlds in human history beyond the JudeoChristian.   It is from my JudeoChristian learnings while growing up that I fell in love with Roman history, and therefore Greek mythology as well, concepts  of life, God, and the inevitability of death.

That curiosity led me to study and learn Latin my sophomore year in high school….I loved learning history, where we’ve come from and why.   I was a child of the depression and the  second World War.   I was lucky.  It was a good time to be in American schools where I lived then.   My Lutheran learnings of the Old and New Testaments during Sunday School were led by the same gifted, cultural, learned teacher old maids whom I loved listening to in public grade school from 3rd grade until Confirmation.

They taught me that God, that is, God the Father, the all powerful, had no form.  HE was beyond form and ALL AND FOREVER POWERFUL, THE ORIGIN AND PURPOSE OF ALL LIFE AND EXISTENCE.   Genesis, Chapter One and Two were powerful teachers  in those days of satisfying my male wonderment..

Although without form, God the Father of all existence, known and unknown, was Male in power, mind,  and duty,  the foundation of all matter, human, animal, and mineral to survive a hostile world…..the primary world and purpose of the existence of the  human male…….to protect and provide for the continuation of the species and survival of his off spring.

Sacred in that off-spring is the gift, miracle,  and mystery of life borne and delivered by the human female.

He was  born  for purpose, a killer, a protector, a provider, a builder, a thinker,  an inventor and such of the species.  She was  born to be protected,  to be a loving Mother and ‘teacher’ and protector of her off-spring when required.

That was in the good old days when men were men and women were women.   Today in 2019 America,  the ditsy Leftists of America sell a different story…..pretending there are no important differences between human male and female.   Most American female animals outside the “Church”  don’t raise, “Mother”  their children much more than a week or two after the baby’s birth.   Fathers tend to disappear, some returning to their animal past and become Dems.    What a culture!

 

https://www.prageru.com/video/why-god-is-a-he/